Messages

51

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 240: They Call Him 'The Streak'

« on: April 30, 2011, 07:51:34 PM »

True, but that's not what I was getting at. I've no doubt that new consoles are coming from MS and Sony. I must doubt that those new consoles will be "much" more powerful. Stream will likely end up being the weakest of the three, but only to the degree that the PS2 was weaker than the Gamecube and Xbox. I think MS and Sony will have to pull a Wii, and make something beyond mere added horsepower be the primary hook of their new system.

The tech aspect I think is going to depend on several different factors: one, the cost and whether or not the game divisions at Microsoft and Sony can get the permission to sell their hardware at a loss again (seems highly unlikely in Sony's case at least). Second, is a tech hike going to affect third party support adversely due to the financial barrier of entry - we know devs are tech whores but aside from companies like Epic and id it's easy to imagine other, smaller companies being priced out of the market if the graphics hike is too large. I think you're probably right noname, that Nintendo's console will be the least powerful but not by a huge amount, and that could make all the difference for third party support. This generation one of the major advantages Nintendo's competitors have had is that ports are easy to make across PC, PS3 and 360, and the install base for these systems is large enough for it to be worth the risk of putting out big budget titles (especially considering by the time the Wii came out and started making sales waves there were already 10 million 360s out there). A smaller divide between the three consoles would mean ports all round. For that reason I actually wonder whether Sony and Microsoft might push for a large tech increase simply to try and remove Nintendo's console from the port equation like this gen, but I doubt it will happen.

One of the disadvantages of the new Nintendo system might be, assuming its horsepower is similar to that of the PS3 and/or 360, that there might not be enough of an incentive for...shall we say...traditional gamers (I don't want to say hardcore - I'm referring I suppose to people who like gaming with traditional, dual analog-y controls) to upgrade if N's system isn't getting third party exclusives. What I mean is that it won't be enough for Nintendo to simply get ports of, say, a new mainline Call of Duty game if it's going to look virtually identical to versions being released on last-generation consoles (360 and PS3), because then there's no incentive for those console owners to upgrade unless they happen to be a Nintendo fan. A hypothetical situation which, of course, would probably be more than enough to satisfy Nintendo fans, but I'm sure Nintendo are going to be looking for a PS2 level of dominance this time around, which means they need to appeal outside of their own hardcore fans and casual players (as well as bringing in those too of course!).

52

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 237: Shiny New Toy

« on: April 10, 2011, 04:58:19 PM »

in his entire Soapbox about what the gaming industry might do to turn a profit, Nintendo was (iirc) not mentioned ONCE.  That's a glaring omission.

Just to pick up on this point specifically, it sounds like you're imagining a bias where this is none. While I agree with you that much enthusiast press does to some extent appear to marginalise Nintendo coverage, and I too greatly value this site, why on earth would you expect Nintendo to be mentioned in a piece about certain sectors of the games industry achieving profitability? Did you forget that Nintendo are a ridiculously profitable company at the moment, not to mention that they are conservative enough to ensure that it's not feasibly possible for them to bleed money the way we've seen Sony and Microsoft bleed? In other words Nintendo are home safe and dry. How on earth does that make for a 'glaring omission'? There's nothing to say about Nintendo in that regard, unless you're looking for a self-congratulatory slap on the back - "Hoozah, the Ninty fans win again! Fans win because the company wins!". Quite clearly the discussion is aimed at both hardware manufacturers and third-party developers who are struggling financially. That's the barrier of entry if you like. No need to be upset that your company of choice was turned away at the door to this particular discussion.

53

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 232: The Opinion Leader

« on: February 21, 2011, 01:27:04 PM »

Alundra! Great choice, since I played and completed this game a few months ago I've always wanted to hear the RFN crew talk about it. I hope you like it Jonny, it definitely seems right up your street, in my opinion it's up there with Okami as far as Zelda clones go! Plus it's hard as nails, something I haven't said about an actual Zelda game in a long while...hmm. The story is pretty good too, and I love the dream sequences.

Now having actually listened to the podcast I have a few comments: for one, the jumping is OK for the most part, but jumping is leveraged a lot in the game, and there are some frustrating moments (one memorable sequence in particular a decent way into the game involves jumping between two moving logs as they float down waterfalls, and one slip sends you back a ways). Thankfully that section is a one off and frustrating moments involving jumping were fairly rare for me, but you do need to get a very good handle on jumping as it is very demanding at times. Also I agree with what you said about the puzzles having a different slant than Zelda. But that doesn't mean that there aren't a ton of Zelda-like puzzles. The puzzles constitute probably both the best and the worst aspect of the game in my opinion. They're so challenging and there are so many in every dungeon that it can feel overwhelming sometimes. Progression can be extremely slow when the dungeons throw challenging, time consuming puzzles at you in every single room. And I don't consider myself a masochist either, I will go to GameFAQs when something is too tough, but somehow Alundra's puzzles almost always walked the fine line for me between do-able and impossible that made me want to complete them on my own without help.

But Jonny, you're absolutely right about the graphics, the game does look great, and some of the soundtrack is really cool too. Some of the enviroments near the end of the game look especially great and for that reason alone I think the game is well worth seeing through all the way. Also, as you mentioned too, the story is definitely darker than Zelda, and it continues to get darker as the game progresses.

54

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 232: The Opinion Leader

« on: February 20, 2011, 09:43:51 PM »

Alundra! Great choice, since I played and completed this game a few months ago I've always wanted to hear the RFN crew talk about it. I hope you like it Jonny, it definitely seems right up your street, in my opinion it's up there with Okami as far as Zelda clones go! Plus it's hard as nails, something I haven't said about an actual Zelda game in a long while...hmm. The story is pretty good too, and I love the dream sequences.

55

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 229: Unicron-Approved

« on: February 04, 2011, 08:46:40 PM »

I can't believe Greg didn't correct Jonny's "Manchester-ian Candidate" joke to "Mancunian Candidate"! I was seething with nerd angst for like ten minutes after that omission. Otherwise, great show!

Especially considering how the pun is much closer with the correct term, it is a strange omission indeed!

56

Podcast Discussion / Re: RFN RetroActive #16 Discussion - Ogre Battle 64: Person of Lo(u)rdly Caliber(re)

« on: January 31, 2011, 04:54:18 PM »

A lot of the problems you're having could have been avoided if you took the tutorial, as it does explain nearly all of the basics.  That said, there are still a lot of things that it never touches upon, so you're overall complaint is quite valid.

The game doesn't even make you aware that soldiers will "evolve". Then compare this to the modern Fire Emblem games on GC and Wii, which do a great job of explaining what you need to do in order to succeed at the game.

Actually, I believe the tutorial does cover this, and more besides.  I think the problem some people are having is that they've become ingrained to the idea that the first hour(s) of the main game will be a tutorial, so that you don't need to read the manual or pick up the basics elsewhere.  Personally, I prefer the way this game approaches it:  it lets me replay the game at any time without having to slog through a "here's how you move your units.  Now you do it!" moment, which I've always found off-putting.  I have a hard time restarting otherwise-great games (like Twilight Princess and Advance Wars 2) because they do start with those, so I'm grateful when a game doesn't.  Your mileage may vary, of course.

I may be remembering wrongly (it's been a long time since I started this game), but I did do the training and I don't remember it being any good for explaining anything other than the basic gameplay mechanics...which of course in a strategy game like this is completely insufficient. I completely agree though that lengthy tutorials in games are undesireable, it's just I feel the information should be in there. And of course it can be in the game and still be optional or skippable for repeat playthroughs. Like I said, I think Fire Emblem is a good example of the right way to do it.

57

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 229: Unicron-Approved

« on: January 30, 2011, 05:54:51 PM »

The RFN crew weighing in on a royal wedding? This episode sounds like a must listen!

58

Podcast Discussion / Re: RFN RetroActive #16 Discussion - Ogre Battle 64: Person of Lo(u)rdly Caliber(re)

« on: January 30, 2011, 05:35:58 PM »

I'm playing Vagrant Story at the moment on PS1, and I'm struggling to decide which of these two games is the less accessible. I will say at least that I do think the Ogre Battle management menus are well designed enough so as to not be overly frustrating or longwinded. Vagrant Story's menus are far more convoluted, which is sad when you consider that in Vagrant Story you're always only overseeing a single character as opposed to god knows how many in Ogre Battle. I'd say it's practically a necessity going to GameFAQs for an explanation of the various systems within the game though, especially for the class system and the chaos frame, which aren't explained very well in-game (or in the case of the chaos frame, not at all). Trouble is, and I think this applies to both Ogre Battle and Vagrant Story, the games are really challenging and a game over in either game can mean a setback of over an hour potentially. I enjoy a challenge and I like SRPGs, but it does annoy me that aside from teaching the very basics, the game provides very little information as to how to actually play it efficiently.

I managed for a while in Ogre Battle on my own but after I started coming up against tougher enemies partway into the game I went to GameFAQs. And what did I learn? That, apparently, early on in the game you should train up as many soldiers as you can, because the earlier you make them the better they will become. I wish there had been some indication in the game about this! The game doesn't even make you aware that soldiers will "evolve". Then compare this to the modern Fire Emblem games on GC and Wii, which do a great job of explaining what you need to do in order to succeed at the game.

59

Podcast Discussion / Re: RFN RetroActive #16 Discussion - Ogre Battle 64: Person of Lo(u)rdly Caliber(re)

« on: January 26, 2011, 07:00:55 PM »

How do you use the elemental attack? It seems like battles hardly ever last long enough for that meter to fill the third time.

Also bear in mind that once you've used an Elem Pedra it takes a long time to get it charged back up so you can use it again, so if you only have one or two it's best saved for important/difficult battles.

60

Podcast Discussion / Re: RFN RetroActive #16 Discussion - Ogre Battle 64: Person of Lo(u)rdly Caliber(re)

« on: January 23, 2011, 06:03:55 PM »

So Caliber/Calibre I understand and graciously accept, but Lordly/Lourdly? I hope I'm right in assuming that this is an intentional joke by Johnny referring to the color/colour difference, as there's no such word as "lourdly" in any English dialect! Also, and it's the same with films, it's commonplace in Britain for American spellings to remain intact in titles of games. So even on the UK's Virtual Console Ogre Battle is subtitled Caliber. Off-topic, but "The Time Traveler's Wife" from a few years ago was a memorable one, I didn't even realise that there was any difference from the British spelling, traveller, until someone pointed it out to me. It can all be quite confusing. At university my professors say a "[sic]" is unnecessary when quoting any American spelling variations, which is a boon considering how many would probably sneak by me unnoticed.

Let's discuss spelling! Or maybe let's not.

61

Podcast Discussion / Re: RFN RetroActive #16 Poll - Second Chance Edition!

« on: January 21, 2011, 09:02:41 PM »

I warned you all! But...the listeners voted, and they got what they wanted! SRPG discussion. Hoorah. Evidently people aren't sick yet of voting for RPGs in these polls.

PS I'm with Broodwars on the formation, mostly because I always found it profoundly satisfying when the two magic-users at the back would use combination magic.

62

Podcast Discussion / Re: RFN RetroActive #16 Poll - Second Chance Edition!

« on: January 15, 2011, 12:52:28 PM »

I'm going to repost a post I made back in the thread for the N64 Retroactive poll as it addresses both Ogre Battle and Perfect Dark and I think it's still relevant:

Honestly, voting for Ogre Battle 64 immediately after we just did Mother 3 is a terrible idea. The game is great and I'd recommend it to any fan of SRPGs, but I'm over 25 hours in and the story certainly does not look to be wrapping itself up anytime soon. As with most SRPGs it is one hell of a lengthy game, and compared to others I've played like Fire Emblem and Shining Force, I would say Ogre Battle 64 is significantly more complex, at least when it comes to preparing for a battle. Because there's so much to prepare and doing so can take a significant amount of time, the game feels very slow, slower than your average SRPG, and since story scenes do not necessarily occur at the end of every battle, attempting to play this game with a deadline, even over several weeks, would be a total slog.

My vote goes to Perfect Dark, and one of the things I appreciate most about Goldeneye and Perfect Dark is the way they are designed to be both instantly accessible for quick, arcadey multiplayer sessions, whilst the single player is actually a fair length and with the difficulty levels can be played in depth with a lot of replay value. It seems to me like there'd be a great deal to discuss in an interesting way as there are so many ways of experiencing the game, within both multiplayer and singleplayer modes. In contrast a discussion of Ogre Battle could very easily become bogged down in discussions concerning classes, unit formations etc., which wouldn't make compelling listening for me at any rate.

The tl;dr version is basically that I don't think all those voting for Ogre Battle have actually considered the resulting conversation we'll get out of the game. Perfect Dark pretty much guarantees an interesting conversation because there's so much to discuss. Ogre Battle is so inaccessible, long and repetitive that the resulting discussion could easily end up devolving into discussing technical strategies and tactics etc, which I personally wouldn't want. The story is decent from the 35 hours I've played but even now it feels like its a long way away from getting interesting like the story in the Fire Emblem games, and there's not much to say about it except that the choices it gives sometimes are pretty cool.

The other factor, for me anyway, is that as a PAL gamer I don't have access to Ogre Battle on my N64. Perfect Dark on the other hand is sitting on my shelf and I could do with an excuse to pick it back up and finally finish the single player.

63

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 222: Faux Badassery

« on: December 13, 2010, 09:11:16 AM »

Before I dive into the discussion of my Lindemann Syndrome, I feel I must respond to Greg's statement qualifying statement, "if you like old-school auto-scrolling levels in old platformers, you'll like DKCR". I loved DKCR but HATE old-school auto-scrolling levels, primarily because I was someone who also enjoys playing through such games as Mario with my finger glued to the run button, and old-school auto-scrolling levels just went far too slow for me. However, when there is much greater sense of speed or urgency in auto-scrolling levels, I tend to love them (re: Bit.Trip Runner and DKCR).

Thanks for that, that clinches it then - I'm getting DKCR. I'm the exact way with Super Mario Bros, I love just speeding through at top speed not slowing down for anything. Especially love how a well timed jump in SMB allows you to jump over the tall pipes even with the fire flowers sticking out. And most old autoscrolling levels I agree are far too slow.

64

TalkBack / Re: RFN: Doin' It Live... for the Kids!

« on: December 07, 2010, 12:29:30 PM »

it's great to see the donation coming even now that the show is over. 2215$ reached, yay!

on a side note, here's what you missed in the last part of my call...I hope it'll be as fun for you to listen as it was for me to do

http://www.mediafire.com/?iiforyxgr0j7217

Ha ha, not bad Luca! It's too bad that bit got cut from the show but oh well Always good to have more European representatives on the podcast! Also thanks to Karl for posting, I missed the whole thing on the day unfortunately so this is my chance to experience the experience! I'm impressed at how good it sounds, and the lack of editing doesn't make it any less entertaining - cross talk for example is infrequent and doesn't interfere.

65

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 220: Not That Kind of Doctor

« on: November 27, 2010, 06:53:52 PM »

Greg, some post office clerk is most likely playing your copy of Epic Yarn and lauging as you lament your loss on RFN.

Hrmm, shipped direct from Yemen alongside boxes of toner cartridges. Very puzzling. I'm sure it'll turn up during an official inquiry at some point...

Both equally valid theories I'm sure anyone would agree. Seriously though could've just been a dodgy online retailer or some problem at customs maybe?

66

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 220: Not That Kind of Doctor

« on: November 26, 2010, 08:54:54 PM »

Hrmm, shipped direct from Yemen alongside boxes of toner cartridges. Very puzzling. I'm sure it'll turn up during an official inquiry at some point...

67

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 220: Not That Kind of Doctor

« on: November 25, 2010, 06:44:16 AM »

At present I've not had reason to really "rant" about anything.  I haven't played a game of dubious quality in quite some time.

True, but it's a similar situation with Mark Kermode, as rant-inducing films only crop up every once in a while. But when they do, it is a sheer delight. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm taking my balls and going home.

68

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 220: Not That Kind of Doctor

« on: November 24, 2010, 11:05:27 PM »

The email this episode was right, and in my opinion it is a testament to how good this show is that it can garner comparisons with the likes of Mark Kermode's fantastic programme! I listen to both podcasts every week though and as much as I love Kermode's rants, when pressed I have to say I prefer James Jones's...both are definitely essential listening though. Cheers for another great week guys.

69

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 218: Killed in the Restroom, Again

« on: November 08, 2010, 05:23:31 PM »

While people may have fond memories of Goldeneye 007 on N64, is there much appeal in playing it now? I'm certainly not one to laud the achievements of the First Person Shooter, which has staled in its growing popularity, but it's obvious that the genre has come a long way since then.

Well, I say that, but perhaps I'm just being spiteful, as I never owned the game. I've only played it twice, not for more than an hour either time and only deathmatches - no single player experience. It was okay, but Smash Bros Melee trumped it easily in terms of multiplayer fun.

Funnily enough, I've not even seen the Goldeneye film and don't have any knowledge of its plot. All the reviews of Goldeneye on Wii have discussed the revised storyline with mixed opinions, but that will have zero impact on me, because I have nothing to judge the new story against.

It's quite a tough question to answer as someone who's had and known the game for so long, but I would say that yes, there is plenty of appeal to be found in playing Goldeneye today. I suspect others may disagree, but it seems like a lot of people simply go and take one look at the game and then say "wow the graphics are worse than I remembered" and proceed to write it off. The FPS genre has changed a lot since 1997 and that's actually the reason why GE is still unique and interesting to me. Half-Life, which came out the year after was the more influential shooter for the genre I would argue, and I think you'll find most modern shooters are far more frequently based on that game's template.

In case you haven't played it, structurally Half-Life is a completely continuous world, loosely split into large chapters which are essentially irrelevant as you can save and load anywhere. It never takes the player out of the game experience between sections of the game. It also pioneered the use of heavily scripted events, where big events that would typically take place in cutscenes are done in real time, while you are in control of the character. Now from my limited experience with modern FPS's it seems like this is the common model.

Goldeneye uses a self-contained stage-by-stage structure whereby after every mission (and most of these are fairly short, I'd say they average about 5-10 minutes each) you are taken out of the game back to the menu to go into another one. There are no save points or checkpoints of any sort within any of the missions. As a result, and thanks to the game's high difficulty, Goldeneye's structure feels very old-school. It offers lots of incentives to go back and replay the missions on a higher difficulty level, to unlock cheats and the 2 secret singleplayer levels. And, as was brought up in the podcast, the higher difficulty levels add extra objectives to every mission and substantially alter the way you play.

The Half-Life model has the benefit of being more cinematic, more story-driven, and more "immersive" (not sure if that word is still allowed in gaming today). The Goldeneye model, as I said, is much more old-school. The equivalents in the platformer genre are the modern Prince of Persia games (Half-life's equivalent) and the Super Mario Bros games (GE's). Clearly neither of the two are intrinsically better than the other in my opinion, it's entirely a matter of personal preference, but hopefully this gives an idea of how Goldeneye manages to differentiate itself from modern shooters, and certain modern gaming trends in general. Now the recent retro revival (particularly with games like Super Meat Boy) shows that there is still a demand for these non-continuous, distinctly un-cinematic experiences and I would say your tolerance for old-school sensibilities should be the main factor in the decision of whether to play or not to play Goldeneye.

Anyway that was a long way to explain it, but I feel as though on the harder difficulties Goldeneye has much more in common with a game experience such as Super Ghouls 'n' Ghosts than another shooter like Half-Life. Because it can be so very demanding, it's immensely satisfying when you finally master a level, pull off everything perfectly and make it through alive by the skin of your teeth, or in the case of the cheat challenges, when you beat it one second under the time limit. Also, unlike the graphics, the game's fantastic level design and weapons have not aged. Also possibly most importantly (it is the thing you're doing in the game the most after all), it is very satisfying to shoot enemies. It just feels really good.

Hopefully that gives you an idea of the appeal of this game - it's certainly not for everyone in the single-player mode at least, but it has the sort of challenge many modern shooters just don't offer or incentivise the player well enough to try. Oh and as a footnote as it's a Rare game it has the advantages of a good PAL conversion which is a nice plus.

In fact I just looked it up and found this interesting (from a Cubed3 forum post): "It\'s really arguable either way, and is a tough one to call, but I personally deem the PAL versions to be the definitive versions of both GoldenEye 007, and Perfect Dark. The increased resolution of the PAL versions is more evident (and makes for a clearer multiplayer experience when the screen is devided up into quarters) than the more stable framerates of the NTSC version. Of which only really comes into play when the game slows down. It still slows down, it just drops a few less frames than the PAL one, so is arguably negligible. You could argue for either version though, there\'s so little in it either way. Which again highlights how great Rare was."

Maybe this could help explain Johnny's complaint about it being hard to distinguish things clearly?

70

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 218: Killed in the Restroom, Again

« on: November 08, 2010, 12:33:14 PM »

Great discussion of Goldeneye, I absolutely love that game to this day. It, alongside Mario Kart 64, is the most played multiplayer game at my flat for 2 years running now. I had it when I was young but because of it's difficulty I struggled even to beat the game on Agent difficulty. Nowadays I find it much easier, and I have almost beaten all the levels on 00 Agent (still can't believe it's been 11 years and I haven't even unlocked the final Egyptian level), as well as having gotten almost all of the cheats. The most difficult of these by the way, is the Invincibility cheat, which demands that the player beat Facility on 00 Agent in a heart condition aggravating 2 mins 5 seconds. It's doable, but it took me several hours worth of failed attempts!

I understand the complaints about the graphics, and going back today they are highly dated (although this is also the case for almost every 3D N64 game), but I think you very rightly mentioned the fact that it was well designed graphically so as not to be overly confusing. A character or an enemy will always stand out from the background enough so as to be distinguishable. Mines too were just the right size that they could be noticeable, even in multiplayer, but not always immediately apparent. It takes some strategy to plant mines in a place where they won't be seen by the approaching player. It does take a bit of getting used to sometimes - usually when a friend is round at mine and plays GE for the first time, they tend to complain initially about not being able to see a gun on the ground. This can be difficult with the small weapons especially. Also I should mention that if like me all you play are N64 and PS1 games you'll become accustomed to the primitive graphics very easily - they are in no way worse than other games of the time.

I also agree that the biggest strength of the game's singleplayer is its variety. Most of the objectives are very simple, but the means by which you have to approach a level or a particular environment can differ wildly from mission to mission. You guys mentioned two of the best examples - Bunker 2, which is the most overtly stealth oriented level, and the Train, the closest thing the game has to a shooting gallery. In the middle of those two extremes though on 00 Agent a lot of the strategy for survival boils down to enemy management and ensuring you don't get overwhelmed by sheer numbers. Usually the best way to handle a room full of several guards is to lure them into a doorway or a limited up close space, so on certain levels there is a lot of shooting at closed doors with a loud weapon and waiting for the enemies to haplessly wander in and killing them before they have a chance to fire a single round. Other levels, primarily the outdoor ones like the Jungle, do not afford this kind of luxury and you're always being asked to adapt and act according to your environment.

One of the best examples in my opinion is in the Cave level. The majority of the level has you running down a thin, defined single path sparsely populated with guards, but with a parrallel path running either overhead or underneath which has guards on too who you need to maintain awareness of. This is interesting itself as there are several possible routes and strategies to adopt, but where it gets really good is near the end of the level when you come to the level's largest room, shaped like a cross with the bottom cut off. The entrance is right in the centre so you have three directions to shoot at/be shot at from. One of your objectives is to use a radio which is situated at the top of the room, in the midst of a large number of explosive barrels. If you shoot the barrels (very tempting as there are several guards in the vicinity), you will fail the mission. There are also guards situated either side of the cross. So there are several strategic considerations to be made. You simply cannot afford to stand in the middle accruing damage from five guards while you scope them all out individually. If you were to run up into the top of the cross, killing the guards there without hitting the barrels and then take cover, the other guards shooting at you will likely almost certainly hit aforementioned barrels, causing your death and the radio to be destroyed simultaneously. I don't have time to cover all the other factors that come into play in this room alone, but it's an exciting piece of level design that forces the player to strategise intelligently.

And if it's not your cup of tea, the game always offers the option to stick to the Agent difficulty and rely exclusively on your trigger finger!

71

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 216: Made from Real Explosions

« on: October 29, 2010, 11:13:43 PM »

Wow, what a ridiculous argument that guy put forward. I very rarely get the opportunity nowadays to play anything other than PS1 and N64 games so for me the current consoles exist almost exclusively in my imagination and yet this is no way impairs my love for this podcast. And I would hope that most listeners respect and have interests across the whole of the gaming spectrum, including at least some areas that Nintendo does not make its primary focus. If RFN were to focus exclusively on Nintendo the sights of the podcast would be too narrow in my opinion, and the listeners and podcast crew alike would end up losing out on the benefits of a broad perspective. Nintendo fanatics who lose touch with alternative experiences on offer these days are the kinds of people who end up trying to defend individual friend codes for every game as "progressive" or "cutting edge", simply because they don't know any better.

This week's interview was really enjoyable, and well done because I thought you guys did a great job of keeping a conversation with a developer, exclusively (currently at least) developing for the 360,  rooted in a Nintendo context by using Super Metroid and other Nintendo game touchstones as examples.

And finally just to say that that was an impressive Retronauts send-off, Greg! I have to second the survival horror episode recommendation, that was one of the first Retronauts episodes I listened to and it cemented me as a podcast listener, which soon led me to discover this very show. Fantastic stuff - I remember listening to it in bed and gradually becoming more and more SCARED in my half-asleep state during the discussion of Eternal Darkness! I had to switch it off in the end I was such a wimp.

72

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 214: Something-a-Trois

« on: October 15, 2010, 02:30:40 PM »

I want to take a stab at guessing the mystery guest: Denis Dyack.

Seconded! I have the distinct impression this may be correct...

73

Podcast Discussion / Re: Poll for RetroActive #14: N64 Edition

« on: September 18, 2010, 10:44:48 PM »

Honestly, voting for Ogre Battle 64 immediately after we just did Mother 3 is a terrible idea. The game is great and I'd recommend it to any fan of SRPGs, but I'm over 25 hours in and the story certainly does not look to be wrapping itself up anytime soon. As with most SRPGs it is one hell of a lengthy game, and compared to others I've played like Fire Emblem and Shining Force, I would say Ogre Battle 64 is significantly more complex, at least when it comes to preparing for a battle. Because there's so much to prepare and doing so can take a significant amount of time, the game feels very slow, slower than your average SRPG, and since story scenes do not necessarily occur at the end of every battle, attempting to play this game with a deadline, even over several weeks, would be a total slog.

My vote goes to Perfect Dark, and one of the things I appreciate most about Goldeneye and Perfect Dark is the way they are designed to be both instantly accessible for quick, arcadey multiplayer sessions, whilst the single player is actually a fair length and with the difficulty levels can be played in depth with a lot of replay value. It seems to me like there'd be a great deal to discuss in an interesting way as there are so many ways of experiencing the game, within both multiplayer and singleplayer modes. In contrast a discussion of Ogre Battle could very easily become bogged down in discussions concerning classes, unit formations etc., which wouldn't make compelling listening for me at any rate.

74

Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 209: Dubious Magnanimity

« on: September 06, 2010, 09:02:09 PM »

Glad to hear Jonny that you're still planning on doing a spoiler heavy follow up on Mother 3, as personally I was disappointed with the Retroactive discussion. Someone mentioned during its brief initial discussion on RFN that the game seems to be building to something, and that was the sense I had throughout the majority of the game. This was the big topic I was hoping for discussion on - whether the game makes good on its build up. I feel as Mother 3 is paced more like an old fashioned novel, or a Japanese film than a game, as the plot development starts off slow (aside from the major event in chapter 1 which sets up the whole story) but quickens considerably toward the end. As a result the forum thread ended up becoming primarily a discussion of the divisive ending, and arguably that is what the game relies on as its primary compelling feature (at least this was the sole reason I persevered when I had a tough time with the bosses - my fault for not realising about the frog banks...). I haven't played it, but to me Mother 3 was just like Johnny described Heavy Rain, where there is a combination of hope and expectation that the conclusion to the plot will prove satisfying that motivates playing through to the end.

Also more on the topic of this episode specifically, when the last email from Steve was read I mistook the meaning of it, and at first I thought it had been misunderstood by the crew and was planning on writing that here, but listening back it was me who misinterpreted it. Still I think my mistake could be a potentially interesting question in its own right, even if it is somewhat similar, so I'll be emailing that soon.

Oh yes and just to add to the growing string of approving comments, the stinger to this episode was absolutely hilarious, loved it!

75

Podcast Discussion / Re: Mother 3 - RetroActive #13 Discussion Thread

« on: August 07, 2010, 11:17:10 PM »

Well it's 4am here but I just finished Mother 3. Wow, I have to say overall it was a really enjoyable and ambitious experience, one that clearly had a ton of care and effort put into it. The writing is excellent and without it I have to admit there wouldn't be nearly as much to enthuse about. In some ways though I feel the experience was probably too ambitious for a portable product - the game is always good at providing regular savepoints but the endgame is very lengthy and as such not well equipped for portability. Perhaps it was partly for this reason that Mother 3 ended up reminding me a great deal of Ocarina of Time (the combination of the climb up the Empire Pork Building, the variety in the final battles and the final image of Osohe Castle being razed followed by the lengthy character credits - plus the latter had that nostalgia soaked feeling that certain Nintendo titles possess, and it was blatant about it too during the boat ride in the Empire Pork Building. An off-topic example of that incredible nostalgia in another game - Rainbow Road in Mario Kart 64 makes me well up every time). It really makes me wonder how things might've turned out differently had the game been realised in its prior conception as Earthbound 64.

Also I very much enjoyed the music battle system and after getting the hang of it it became quite satisfying, it definitely made enemies and bosses much easier and meant I was able to avoid grinding. The rolling counter is cool too and I like the way it's there to be exploited, it can force you to make decisions quickly or in the case of the final battle, very very slowly... In addition the music throughout the game is excellent. I especially love the song Snowman. I'm left wondering why the hell there isn't a single song on OCRemix...

Finally I have to say I'm slightly surprised to read comments about the game being unsatisfactory in comparison with Earthbound - I tried EB a few years ago and while I enjoyed aspects of it, such as the quirky humour and the battle system, I wasn't compelled to play it through to completion.